Screening of Potential Plasticizer Alternatives for Their Toxic Effects on Male Germline Stem Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasticizers give flexibility to a wide range of consumer and medical plastic products. Among them, phthalate esters are recognized as endocrine disruptors that target male reproductive functions. With this notion, past studies designed and produced alternative plasticizers that could replace phthalates with limited toxicity to the environment and to male reproductive functions. Here, we focused on one reproductive cell type that was not investigated in past studies—spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs)—and examined in vitro the effects on 22 compounds (seven plasticizers currently in use and 15 newly synthesized potential alternative plasticizers) for their effects on SSCs. Our in vitro compound screening analyses showed that a majority of the compounds examined had a limited level of toxicity to SSCs. Yet, some commercial plasticizers and their derivatives, such as DEHP (di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate) and MEHP (mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate), were detrimental at 10−5 to 10−4 M. Among new compounds, some of maleate- and fumarate-derivatives showed toxic effects. In contrast, no detrimental effects were detected with two new compounds, BDDB (1,4 butanediol dibenzoate) and DOS (dioctyl succinate). Furthermore, SSCs that were exposed to BDDB and DOS in vitro successfully established spermatogenic colonies in testes of recipient mice after transplantation. These results demonstrate that SSC culture acts as an effective platform for toxicological tests on SSC function and provide novel information that two new compounds, BDDB and DOS, are alternative plasticizers that do not have significant negative impacts on SSC integrity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".